Skip to content
BYU

BYU Cougars

Big 12·2-0·
Compare
Elo
1666#30
SP+
16.8#18
FPI
14.1
AP
#15
Next@ Colorado State · Wk 3Win prob 95%Model -24.2
Talent #59 (689.4)Recruiting class #2179% production returning

Roster · 118 players

FR 52SO 27JR 18SR 21
#PlayerPosClHtWt
10Treyson BourguetQBSR6'2"210
15John SandersQBSO6'0"190
16Owen GeilmanQBFR6'4"220
17Enoch WatsonQBFR6'3"215
47Bear BachmeierQBSO6'2"230
4LJ MartinRBSR6'2"225
12Preston RexRBSR6'0"200
20Journee TongaRBFR5'8"198
25Devaughn EkaRBFR5'11"195
28Jovesa DamuniRBSO6'0"195
30Sione MoaRBSO5'10"220
34Charlie MiskaRBSO5'11"215
38Logan PayneRBFR5'10"210
41Lucky FinauRBJR5'11"220
42Micah BecksteadRBFR5'10"238
0Tei NacuaWRSO6'2"190
1Legend GlaskerWRFR6'1"175
3Kyler KasperWRJR6'6"212
5Jaron PulaWRFR6'3"200
13Jojo PhillipsWRJR6'5"205
18Reggie FrischknechtWRSO6'4"207
19Tiger BachmeierWRSR6'1"190
21Asher YoungWRFR6'3"205
22Trey RobertsWRFR6'1"195
23Terrance SaryonWRFR5'11"170
26Fisher IngersollWRSR6'2"195
33Jared EsplinWRFR6'1"195
84Kila KeoneWRFR6'4"185
89Jett NelsonWRFR6'4"212
2Roger Saleapaga IITEJR6'4"235
7Walker LyonsTEJR6'4"245
24Ethan WoodTEJR6'5"250
44Josh DavisTEFR6'4"240
45Keayen NeadTESR6'5"260
80Jacob NyeTEFR6'5"245
82Noah MoeakiTESO6'3"245
83Will ZundelTESO6'5"240
87Matthew FredrickTEFR6'5"242
51Sonny MakasiniOLSR6'4"315
52Bott MulitaloOLFR6'5"310
53Strantz MangisiOLFR6'4"300
54Jake AlexanderOLFR6'6"270
56Zak YamauchiOLSO6'4"315
57Talitu'i PututauOLFR6'5"270
58Paki FinauOLSO6'5"310
59Siosiua Latu-FinauOLFR6'5"310
62Jr SiaOLSO6'5"330
63Bruce MitchellOLSR6'4"305
64Kyle SfarciocOLSR6'4"305
66Brigham AlexanderOLFR6'5"320
67Trevor PayOLSO6'3"295
72Joe BrownOLSO6'4"310
73Caden McKeeOLFR6'6"275
74Trevin OstlerOLSR6'4"320
75Andrew GentryOLSR6'8"310
76Jeff LewisOLFR6'6"295
78Ethan ThomasonOLFR6'8"315
5Nusi TaumoepeauDESO6'3"242
10Orion Maile-KaufusiDESO6'3"242
13Tausili AkanaDEJR6'3"235
42Adney ReidDEFR6'5"238
46Kendal WallDEFR6'5"240
48Bodie SchoonoverDESR6'3"275
52Vincent TautuaDEFR6'3"250
59Siosefa BrownDEFR6'4"240
90Hunter CleggDESO6'4"250
97Kinilau FonohemaDESO6'5"250
98Devoux TuatagaDEFR6'6"265
41Nehemiah KoloneDTFR6'4"265
45Viliami Po'uhaDTJR6'3"278
50Maverick McManusDTFR6'5"272
57Keanu TanuvasaDTSR6'4"300
58David TangilanuDTFR6'5"280
93Kelepi Latu-FinauDTFR6'5"290
94Anisi PurcellDTSR6'3"305
96Justin KirklandDTSR6'3"310
99Ulavai FetuliDTFR6'4"285
4Cade UluaveLBSR6'1"230
16Isaiah GlaskerLBSR6'5"240
18Ace KaufusiLBJR6'4"235
21Miles HallLBJR6'1"230
23Pierson WatsonLBFR6'3"230
30Braxton LindseyLBFR6'3"240
31Jake CliftonLBJR6'2"230
33Maika KaufusiLBJR6'3"235
34Daniel TaumoepeauLBJR6'0"225
43Owen BorgLBFR6'2"225
51Gage TannerLBFR6'1"225
54Siale EseraLBJR6'3"250
55Blake LoweLBFR6'3"225
0Evan JohnsonCBSR6'0"185
1Therrian Alexander IIICBJR6'2"175
2Jonathan KabeyaCBSO5'10"180
15Jayven WilliamsCBSR6'2"175
20Kevin DoeCBJR6'3"206
26Jordyn CrissCBFR6'2"175
29Justice BrathwaiteCBFR6'1"175
32Cannon DeVriesCBSO6'0"184
39Seth ShiggCBFR5'10"182
3Raider DamuniSSR6'1"210
7Kennan PulaSFR6'3"200
11Faletau SatualaSJR6'4"215
17Jarinn KalamaSSO6'3"210
22Tommy PrassasSSO6'2"200
24Payton VanSteenkisteSSO6'0"195
25Lance ReynoldsSFR6'2"190
27Matthias LeachSSO6'3"184
28Crew ClarkSFR6'1"195
35Matthew MasonSFR6'3"195
36TJ JohnsonSFR6'3"175
37Joseph DouglasSSO6'2"210
97Matthias DunnPKSR6'0"205
99Brody LagaPKFR5'11"170
19Fuller ShurtzPJR5'11"185
36Cole ShulmanPFR6'0"175
47Berkley AlfreyLSFR6'0"225
49Rayden HeintzLSSO6'0"212
88Ty SmithLSSO6'0"205

Team Statistics · per game, with national FBS rank

Points / game
45.5
scoring offense
Points allowed
12.0
scoring defense
Differential
+33.5
per game
Offense
Total yards / game
443.0#43
Yards / play
7.1#29
Passing yards / game
215.0#84
Rushing yards / game
228.0#27
First downs / game
23.0#48
3rd down %
68.2%#4
4th down %
——
Time of possession
29:56#81
Defense
Yards allowed / game
255.5#31
Yards / play allowed
4.3#37
Pass yards allowed / game
182.5#56
Rush yards allowed / game
73.0#19
3rd down % allowed
40.0%#90
Sacks
4#60
Tackles for loss
9#94
Turnovers & Discipline
Turnover margin
+5#5
Takeaways
5#9
Giveaways
0#1
Penalties / game
6.0#46
Penalty yards / game
52.5#58

Rank is national among all FBS teams (#1 = best), oriented so higher rank = better even for defensive and discipline metrics. Bars show percentile.

Scouting Report · 2026 projection

balanced

BYU is in year 11 under Kalani Sitake, whose offenses have been balanced. The strengths are on both sides of the ball, led by 4th at keeping a clean pocket. The way in is 135th at hitting chunk plays.

On fourth down he goes for it more often than his peers do from the same spots (+3.1%). Against what the expected-points model recommends he is −27.3% — the profession as a whole is negative on this.

BYU has played 1 game against an average slate, adjusted for here. That football carries about 0% of what is below; the rest is still the preseason projection.

Projected strengths

  • Offensesacks and tackles for loss
    #4
    projected
  • Defensesurviving second and twelve
    #7
    projected
  • Defenseturning trips inside the 40 into points
    #8
    projected

Projected soft spots

  • Offensehitting chunk plays
    #135
    projected

Each bar is where this team sits in the country. Before the season has produced enough football these are PROJECTIONS — last season regressed to the mean, plus talent, returning production, recruiting and whether the staff is the same one — and the season replaces them as it is played. Head coaches only — there is no free feed for coordinators, so on a program where the head coach does not call the offense this describes the staff he hired. Play-calling identity is a style, not a grade: throwing more than the situations warrant is not better than throwing less than they warrant.

2026 Season Projection

model win prob · 10 to play
10.2 – 1.8
projected final record (now 2–0)
Exp. wins left
8.2
of 10 games
Bowl odds
100%
reach 6 wins
Best odds
95%
vs Colorado State
Toughest
46%
vs Notre Dame

How the season could finish · 2026 · chance of each final win total · 10 games left

Every remaining game simulated from the model's win probability for it. Tallest bar is the single likeliest finish, not a prediction that it happens.

23456789101112
final winstallest bar = 33% chance
Likeliest finish 10-2 (33%)Bowl eligible 100% · marked on the axis at 6

Player Value

EPA contribution by position group + estimated NIL market value (derived from position rates and on-field production — not actual deal figures).

Unit Value — Total EPA
QBBear Bachmeier
+33.7 EPA
WRKyler Kasper, Tiger Bachmeier +3
+27.0 EPA
RBLJ Martin, Preston Rex +1
+14.0 EPA
TERoger Saleapaga, Walker Lyons
+1.7 EPA

Total EPA produced by each positional group this season. OL value is captured via the rush/pass efficiency of skill players; OL-specific EPA isn't separately reported.

Estimated NIL Market Value
ESTIMATED
QBBear Bachmeier
~$983K
EPA +33.70.602/play56 snaps
RBLJ Martin
~$199K
EPA +5.40.174/play31 snaps

Estimated from position-group market rates and on-field EPA contribution. Actual NIL valuations depend on social media following, brand fit, and market negotiations — these figures are directional only.

The Five Factors

ranked vs. FBS · bar = better
Efficiency (PPA)
Off0.5294th#9
Def0.0469th#44
Explosiveness
Off1.1938th#86
Def1.1471st#41
Field position
Off68.030th#97
Def73.340th#83
Finishing (pts/opp)
Off5.6091st#14
Def3.0064th#50
Turnovers
Won 5Lost 0
Margin +5

Opponent-adjusted efficiency

EPA/play vs. schedule
Offense
—
Defense
—
Off · pass
0.4871st#41
Off · rush
0.5095th#8

Pass vs. rush (PPA)

Rushing
Off0.5095th#8
Def-0.0056th#61
Passing
Off0.4871st#41
Def0.1367th#46

Trenches & disruption

Line yards (off)
4.12#5
2nd-level / open-field
1.62 / 1.00
Power / stuff (off)
100.0% / 7.7%
Havoc — total (def)
15.8%#66
Havoc — front 7 / DB
8.3% / 7.5%

Standard vs. passing downs

Pro
Std downs
Off0.49
Def-0.28
Pass downs
Off0.63
Def0.55

PPA on each down type (off vs. def).

Opponent-adjusted by down

Pro
1st2nd3rd
Offense0.33#120.56#160.96#15
Defense-0.31#150.47#1250.27#56

Elo Trajectory

Utah TechFinal
Elo rating 1666 → 1683+17 over season

Team Fingerprint · 2026 · 43 opponent-adjusted metrics · percentile vs 138 FBS teams

Plot these →
worst in FBSbest

Efficiency

  • Offense EPA/play0.5095th
  • Defense EPA/play allowed0.0460th
  • Offense success rate59%98th
  • Defense success rate allowed36%55th

Downs

  • Offense success — standard downs65%99th
  • Offense success — passing downs35%60th
  • Defense success allowed — standard downs36%77th
  • Defense success allowed — passing downs37%17th

Explosiveness

  • Offense explosiveness1.232nd
  • Defense explosiveness allowed1.172nd
  • Offense explosiveness — standard downs0.9735th
  • Offense explosiveness — passing downs2.696th

Trenches

  • Offense line yards4.096th
  • Defense line yards allowed2.374th
  • Offense highlight yards1.150th
  • Defense highlight yards allowed0.4671st
  • Offense power success0.9289th
  • Defense power success allowed0.8818th
  • Offense stuff rate0.1092nd
  • Defense stuff rate0.2150th

Third down

  • Third down conversion68%97th
  • Third down distance faced5.394th
  • Third down conversion allowed46%21st
  • Third down distance forced7.143rd

Halves

  • Net success rate — first half0.1572nd
  • Net success rate — second half0.2391st

Drives

  • Points per drive3.176th
  • Points per drive allowed1.961st
  • Average starting field position2848th
  • Opponent starting field position2849th
  • Available yards gained52%57th
  • Available yards allowed49%53rd
  • Scoring opportunities per drive100%99th
  • Scoring opportunities allowed67%87th
  • Points per scoring opportunity3.164th
  • Points allowed per opportunity2.852nd
  • Three-and-out rate33%32nd
  • Three-and-outs forced22%48th

Roster

  • Returning usage88%95th
  • Returning EPA28494th
  • Team talent composite68958th
  • Recruiting class rank21.085th
  • Recruiting class points23785th

Every metric is opponent-adjusted and ranked so that higher is always better — a defensive rate that is good when low is ranked accordingly. Sack and tackle-for-loss composition are deliberately absent: their relationship to team quality is a measured null, so they carry a style rather than a rank, and they appear in the pressure signature instead.

Intelligence Report

⚡

Offensive DNA

Balanced attack — top 7 nationally by EPA/play
EPA/play
+0.520#9 · elite
Pass EPA/play
+0.483#41
Rush EPA/play
+0.503#8
Explosiveness
1.191#86
Pts/opportunity
5.60#14
Success rate
57.3%

Near-equal efficiency edge: 0.020 EPA/play

🛡

Defensive Identity

EPA/play allowed
+0.039#44 · above avg
Havoc rate (total)
15.8%#66
Front-7 havoc
8.3%
DB havoc
7.5%
Big play rate allowed
1.136#41
Success rate allowed
34.9%

Disruption comes evenly from front and secondary.

📊

Season Signature

45.5 PPG offense, 12.0 allowed — +33.5 margin/game
Points per game
45.5
Points allowed/game
12.0
Scoring margin/game
+33.5
Turnover margin
+5won 5 · lost 0
Production returning
79%
Talent rank (247)
#59

2-0 record through 2 games.

Team Shape · percentile vs. FBS · dashed = 50th

OFFENSE94thEXPLOSIVENESS38thFINISHING91thFIELD POS30thDEFENSE69thHAVOC53th50th100th
Offense
94th
Explosiveness
38th
Finishing
91th
Field Pos
30th
Defense
69th
Havoc
53th

Each axis = national percentile rank. 100th = best in FBS, 0th = worst. Defense and Havoc are oriented so higher = better.

CORE efficiency · situation and opponent removed

Points per 100 plays above average, after the game state is regressed out of every snap and the schedule is solved out across the whole league. The version of this team’s efficiency that can be compared to a team it never played.

Overall
+15.5
#27
Offense
+12.1
#12
Defense
-3.3
#55
Full CORE ratings →

What a possession is worth · 9 drives

MeasureOffenseDefense
Points per drive3.111.89
Starting field positionown 28.3own 28.2
Available yards51.9%49.0%
Scoring opportunities100.0%66.7%
Points per opportunity3.112.83
Three-and-out rate33.3%22.2%
Every team’s drive efficiency →

Play-calling identity

Against what the league calls from the same down, distance, field position, score and clock — so this is the staff, not the game script.

Pass rate
48.2%
Expected, given the spots
40.9%
Over expected
+7.3
Fourth down vs peers
-3
Fourth down vs the model
-100
All play-calling tendencies →

National Landscape · 2026 FBS · offense vs. defense EPA/play

Each dot = one FBS team. BYU is highlighted. Tap or hover a dot for details.

ELITEDEF. FORTRESSOFF. POWERHOUSEREBUILDING-0.100.00+0.10+0.20+0.30-0.050.00+0.10+0.20Offensive EPA/play← worsebetter →Defensive EPA allowed/play← worsebetter →

Similar Programs

Teams with the closest offense + defense efficiency profile to BYU in 2026

by EPA/play distance
SMUSP+ +11.1
Off EPA/play +0.557Def EPA/play +0.037Elo 1728
Match
98%
NebraskaSP+ +12.1
Off EPA/play +0.557Def EPA/play +0.077Elo 1592
Match
97%
UtahSP+ +13.0
Off EPA/play +0.557Def EPA/play +0.117Elo 1817
Match
95%
NorthwesternSP+ +7.8
Off EPA/play +0.480Def EPA/play +0.128Elo 1549
Match
94%
Georgia StateSP+ -22.7
Off EPA/play +0.431Def EPA/play +0.063Elo 1241
Match
94%
HoustonSP+ +6.5
Off EPA/play +0.425Def EPA/play +0.057Elo 1514
Match
94%

Similarity = normalized Euclidean distance on season offensive and defensive EPA/play. Teams within ±0.02 EPA/play on both units score >90%.

Program Trajectory · CORE rating · 2015–2026 · points per game vs an average FBS team

2015: +7.1, #46 of 1282016: +5.7, #43 of 1282017: -11.4, #101 of 1302018: +3.4, #49 of 1302019: +0.1, #61 of 1302020: +33.3, #2 of 1242021: +13.2, #27 of 1302022: +0.6, #65 of 1312023: -6.3, #90 of 1332024: +16.8, #17 of 1342025: +18.0, #20 of 1362026: +15.5, #27 of 138
20152026
Now +15.5 · #27 of 138Best +33.3 in 2020Worst -11.4 in 2017

Program History

recent seasons
YearOverallConfWin %xWLuck
20262-01-0
100%
2.0+0.0
202512-28-1
86%
9.6+2.4
202411-27-2
85%
8.4+2.6
20235-72-7
42%
3.6+1.4
20228-50-2
62%
6.6+1.4
202110-30-0
77%
8.3+1.7
202011-10-0
92%
10.3+0.7
20197-60-0
54%
5.8+1.2
20187-60-0
54%
8.3-1.3
20174-90-0
31%
4.1-0.1

xW = expected wins from per-game dominance. Luck = actual − expected (positive = won close games).

32%of 50,000 simulated 2026 seasons end with them in the field

1-0 so far, projected to finish 9.0-3.3. Top-four bye in 10%. Wins the Big 12 in 19%.

If they finish with…

100%
0 losses
100%
1 loss
78%
2 losses
11%
3 losses
1.0%
4 losses

Their chance of making it at each final loss count. Better than even up to 2.

Win out and it is 100%. Running the table settles it.

up 4.5 points since preseason.

  • At 2 losses they are 78% where the average Big 12 team is 56%.
  • The Big 12 takes 1.77 bids in an average season, and four or more in 1.9%.

BYU’s own turning points

Points of playoff probability between winning and losing.

  • wk7vs Notre Dame41.8
  • wk10at Utah35.0
  • wk5at TCU30.7
  • wk8at UCF28.9
  • wk12at Kansas28.7
  • wk11vs Baylor28.6

Who to root for

Games BYU is not in that move its odds most. Same units, much smaller scale.

  • wk11Arizona over Utah3.9
  • wk9Arizona over Texas Tech3.7
  • wk10West Virginia over Texas Tech3.4
  • wk5Arizona over Cincinnati3.1
  • wk3Utah State over Utah3.1
  • wk5Colorado over Texas Tech2.9
The full playoff picture →

Big 12

1-0 in league play, projected 6.7-2.32 of 16 by title odds
19%
Wins the Big 12
36%
Reaches the title game

The Big 12 sends its top two by conference winning percentage, head-to-head breaking a tie. The last berth is level on percentage in 46% of simulated seasons, so a tiebreaker decides it about that often.

  • wk10BYU at Utah23.7
  • wk5BYU at TCU18.6
  • wk8BYU at UCF17.7
  • wk11Baylor at BYU17.3

Points of title probability riding on each result. The whole Big 12 race →

If not the playoff, then

95%
Bowl eligible
63%
Placed in a bowl
32%
In the playoff
5.8%
Season over in November

BYU is 2-0 and needs 4 more wins from 10 games to reach the six that make a team eligible — at most one of which may come against an FCS opponent. In 1.0% of seasons they get there and still go nowhere: there are more eligible teams than seats.

  • Alamo Bowl13%
  • Texas Bowl12%
  • Pop-Tarts Bowl9.5%
  • Liberty Bowl7.7%
  • Rate Bowl5.9%
  • Independence Bowl5.1%

Every bowl, and how each one picks →

Recruiting Pipelines

since 2010

Of the 170 high-school programs with a pipeline page here, 10 have sent BYU a player since 2010 — 37 signees between them. Where they signed, not where they were offered, and not a complete list of BYU's feeder schools: only these 170 have the outcome history to measure.

High schoolSignedDrafted
BinghamUT91
ChandlerAZ70
Pleasant GroveUT40
San ClementeCA40
ServiteCA30
SkylineTX30
WestlakeGA30
HeritageCA21
All 170 high-school pipelines →
✓/✗ = whether our pregame model picked the winner. Win % & projections from the Gridpex model. Data: CollegeFootballData.